There are very few challenges with assessment of online collaborative projects and activities if the instructor has provided clear guidelines and expectations well before the start of the project or activity. The vital key for an instructor is communication of expectations prior to the onset of a project. Expectations could be developed in the form of a rubric or required length of discussion board posts. If instructors do not set the foundational work, challenges are sure to arise. Rubrics are an easy method for displaying grading criteria which outline expectations in a logical pattern. If students are provided with a clear definition for their responsibility, success increases. Rubrics are also built upon objectivity in grading. Another benefit of rubrics is the ability to tie grading criteria to standards and objectives. Learners are able to identify and for a link between how they are graded and the objectives for the unit or course.
Assessing asynchronous discussion board activities are typically easy because as each learner posts a response, they have documented their quantity participation as well as quality of work. If part of the grading expectation is for a student to respond to three posts, the computer can list the number of times each learner has responded. This quantity grade can be partnered with the quality grade of actually reading the response and identifying whether or not the student has effectively completed the assignment and provided quality feedback or if they are responding with one or two word responses.
Until recently, assessing collaborative group projects has been difficult. In the past, two students would be assigned a topic to create a presentation on. Although both students’ names were listed on the report, one student could have effectively created the entire project. Some instructors will use partner and self-assessments, but even those cannot be proven to be valid. Recent technologies, such as Google Docs and Google Presentation will document and log all modifications made by each individual. If two students are to create a presentation, one requirement may be to provide the instructor with access to the Google Doc file. The instructor can then review the quantity of participation by both individuals in addition to quality grade. Another method of ensuring both students are actively participating would be to have the students create a video presentation in which they would both need to be ‘on camera’ for a specific length of time.
Activity 7: Discussion - Assessing Collaborative Projects
Listen to this activity
There are very few challenges with assessment of online collaborative projects and activities if the instructor has provided clear guidelines and expectations well before the start of the project or activity. The vital key for an instructor is communication of expectations prior to the onset of a project. Expectations could be developed in the form of a rubric or required length of discussion board posts. If instructors do not set the foundational work, challenges are sure to arise. Rubrics are an easy method for displaying grading criteria which outline expectations in a logical pattern. If students are provided with a clear definition for their responsibility, success increases. Rubrics are also built upon objectivity in grading. Another benefit of rubrics is the ability to tie grading criteria to standards and objectives. Learners are able to identify and for a link between how they are graded and the objectives for the unit or course.
Assessing asynchronous discussion board activities are typically easy because as each learner posts a response, they have documented their quantity participation as well as quality of work. If part of the grading expectation is for a student to respond to three posts, the computer can list the number of times each learner has responded. This quantity grade can be partnered with the quality grade of actually reading the response and identifying whether or not the student has effectively completed the assignment and provided quality feedback or if they are responding with one or two word responses.
Until recently, assessing collaborative group projects has been difficult. In the past, two students would be assigned a topic to create a presentation on. Although both students’ names were listed on the report, one student could have effectively created the entire project. Some instructors will use partner and self-assessments, but even those cannot be proven to be valid. Recent technologies, such as Google Docs and Google Presentation will document and log all modifications made by each individual. If two students are to create a presentation, one requirement may be to provide the instructor with access to the Google Doc file. The instructor can then review the quantity of participation by both individuals in addition to quality grade. Another method of ensuring both students are actively participating would be to have the students create a video presentation in which they would both need to be ‘on camera’ for a specific length of time.